Hillsong - A Case For Change
There has been much talk, in the threads about documenting a “Case For Change” for Hillsong.
And very soon, Tanya Levin’s new book “Glass Houses” will hit both the boookstores, and the words contained within will be discussed and debated across the Blogosphere.
Recently, the Bulletin published a positive article on Hillsong, and to be more specific, the closing sermon:
“Skinner addressed the crowd with a blunt message: “You can’t separate God in his awesome power in heaven from the snotty, bloated kid with the fly in his eye in the ditch. God is not impressed by the size of our church. God is not impressed by how many times we go to church but by how much we become like Jesus. The world is on an accumulation binge - give me more and more and more - but God is a giver.”
We have all discussed the ‘what needs to change’ - but I am now left thinking.
1) Is real Change possible within Hillsong and other contemporary Churches?
2) What will be the real driver for change in the Contemporary Church (that includes Hillsong) - Critique or the Gospel?
3) Is reconcilliation without compromise really possible between the Contemporary Church and those overwhelmingly disenfranchised by it?
August 6th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Needs to be said, Janene!
From a public health perspective, I’d be a little nervous about GP’s who ONLY prescribe antidepressants instead of the other advice given here (eg lifestyle issues like nutrition, stress, sleep patterns, exercise…. talking through grief and/or trauma with someone…. giving themselves time to process the grief / trauma)… although antidepressants literally save lives, a journey to wholeness requires more than this alone.
Having said that… it’s also worth saying that some people have a genetic biochemical imbalance in their brain that will be there for life… and they need to take medication for life to stay on an even keel. All the counselling in the world won’t fix a biochemical problem.
August 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
I am an expert on depression!!! I have found that antidepressants are only half the treatment. The need to be combined with professional counselling. A professional counsellor will be able to give you permission to vent without guilt. This is a huge step, especially when recovering from spiritual abuse. To be able to be heard without correction by an empathetic ear who will affirm you and point out areas where you have been victimised and abused is life water to a dry desert. Good professional counselling is an antidote to misplaced guilt. Try and find yourself a good non Christian counsellor. That way you can have an anti church rant without feeling like you are committing an act of betrayal. By a profession counsellor I mean a GP who specialises is psychology, a psychologist or a psychiatrist. I see a psychiatrist regularly. The difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist is that the latter prescribes meds and well as counsels.
Depression can be treated and life can return to normal. But it is so necessary to unravel all the junk with a good counsellor
August 6th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
who would ever have thought Geoff we’d be speaking on the internet about mental health issues that clearly are the result of our faith, time in the pentecostal church and the way our brothers and sisters treated us.
seems quite bizarre dont you think.
Emblazzoned……..can I offer a word of caution.
This certainly does not apply to the majority of people on signposts. In fact the people on this thread are particularly empathatic and compassionate. Instead of being a place of healing the enviroment at times it can be quite toxic. its been a learning lesson for me to be on the thread on homosexuality. A small number it seems can be quite vile at times and by engaging with them it only reinforces and triggers the hurts. They are on the attack constantly. I thank God for the lessons they have taught me in grace and the need to sit back an not respond in the same spirit by try and engage in a respectful dialogue. I didn’t always succeed.
I’m probably telling you something you already know. …but if you find this place healing then stay but if you find the engagements of some people keep you in the place of anger, attack and blame then be kind to yourself and withdraw.
its only a minority but a very active one on some threads. its wonderful to see all the people here reaching out to you. that wasn’t my experience elsewhere.
I have a gay friend who had broken up from his partner of 10 years. Ex AOG bible College student, did the exgay thing etc etc…….and was having huge problems with his faith. Peter Stokes of the Salt Shakers was having an email dialogue with him at the time which actually made mattters worse. I was cc’d on some of the emails. It was all attack……on both sides. You are going to hell. lots of bible verses and condemnation…..never a moment of compassion. This level of engagement contributed to my friend becoming suicidal and we had to hosptialise him. I had to step in and tell Peter to stop emialing him. He did……after one more jibe…….mentioning AIDS and hell.
So i guess i’m just making you aware of what can go on if you are new to this.
a huge thanks to all those here who are reaching out in love. You are the ones that will make a difference.
August 6th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Some days Signposts frustrates, infuriates me and I go off into the sunshine and ponder. Others days, like today, I am thankful I stumbled across this unassuming blog a few years ago and the diverse, interesting, complex, funny, compassionate people who scribe with such honesty. Cyberspace isnt all crap.
August 6th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
i think i’ll add my AMEN to that Daisy.
August 7th, 2007 at 2:30 am
‘who would ever have thought Geoff we’d be speaking on the internet about mental health issues that clearly are the result of our faith, time in the pentecostal church and the way our brothers and sisters treated us.
seems quite bizarre dont you think.’
Yes I think. In fact this whole little sub thread about anti depressants is amazing and sobering when you consider that we are talking about people in post traumatic stress after being in a church. It ought not to be.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:39 am
AVB - Blessings to you. I can’t see Homosexuality in the same light as you do. Just can’t make the connextioin exactly. So here is a question for you. HOW do YOU respond to someone who has a legitimate stance on it that is the opposite of yours?
While i don’t see eye to eye with you, I can’t latch on to the Baptisits who denounce homosexuals and the “God hates fags” crowd at all. mainly becasue I don’t see it that way AT ALL. But I have a vision of Lance holding a sign on a street corner saying ” God hates non-fags”. Seems like two extremes and When you post, I tend to take you seriously and though I disagree with your understanding, it’s really between you and God. I am really glad He has not ask me nor is he going to ask for my take on the issue.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:34 am
hi akevin…….I understand that not everyone will get it. I know i didn’t for 22 years. In fact i dont think i really got to understand it till i’d been out for 6 years……and then of course i think i got greater understanding talking to more people, reading more books and researching for my second book (that is not meant to be a plug for it by the way).
I do appreciate dialogue more than debate. it works better with my personality. I guess the point I was trying to make is there is a very different spirit between dialogue and attack. The spirit comes through loud and clear. I choose to engage with dialogue but refuce to respond to attack. Some individuals on signposts see that as weakness or not having a case. I see it more in the light of self respect.
One day we will have all the answers……not yet though. The church has evolved and no longer approves slavery and in many denominations women are given equal place and not treated as second class citizens. My prayer is that one day those that equate homosexuality with immoratlity instead of seeing it as a sexual orientation will also be more enlightened.
i’d better stop there or i’ll be accused of high jacking this thread to promote the issue fo homosexuality.
thanks for your thoughts and also the spirit in which you expressed it.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:16 am
“But I have a vision of Lance holding a sign on a street corner saying ” God hates non-fags”.
Kevin, that is uncalled for. Lances views on Homosexuality are fairly orthodox. Lance will protest against hypocritacl attitude - rather than hetrosexuality.
I know as I have been on the recieving end, which resulted in an ‘attitude’ adjustment.
August 7th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
If I may gently steer this thread back onto the “case for change” idea… Reve said a couple of days ago:
“Getting back to the purpose of this thread….A Case for Change…..if i was Publicity Officer for Hillsong i would do the following, quickly….”
Despite all Reve’s good suggestions… as I’ve rabbitted on about lately, I think the issues go deeper for me… they are actually about theology; they are about the true gospel; they are about the Spirit of Christ rather than a focus on externals and a worldly view of “success”.
And although in a sense this thread “picks on” Hillsong, I think other megachurches… and other much smaller ones for that matter… would do well to have their leadership sit with the scriptures in submission to the Spirit of God. A vision of the Kingdom of God is a totally different vision to the alpha male “management” vision of giant budgets, giant buildings, enormous membership targets. In this kind of “management” vision, people become tools to implement the grand strategic plan… is this what the kingdom of God is really about… or is this by its very nature dehumanising, and prone to taking our eyes off the Lord and onto “our work and giving for the Lord”?
I’d like to see some top notch bible teachers / theologians working with the Hillsong staff… is that a crazy idea?
(This dovetails with the discussion on the “next installment” thread in true Signposts style)
August 7th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
I agree Janet that it’s a deep seated issue - lack of understanding, lack of theology - ecclesiology and Christology in particular! As to KoG, I always summarise it as human participation in the divine action not human action to promulgate a so-called divine plan. Hillsong et co. definitely fall into the later camp.
And no AVB but it was never a sin to be a woman or a slave. I won’t quibble with you about the history of of the church’s stance towards slavery etc for now (even though I know most have swallowed some PC line instead of history) but I will say, to liken homosexuality to being a woman or a slave is simply, a category error.
August 7th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
“but I will say, to liken homosexuality to being a woman or a slave is simply, a category error”.
Is there a category for Homosexual women slaves …?
August 7th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
“Is there a category for Homosexual women slaves …?”
Yes, it’s called “sinner”
August 7th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Here is a fact,….. as cult & abusive groups expert the Rev Dr David Millikan has stated, the profile of a person that gets caught up in (& remains) in an abusive group is generally what is called “middle-class aspirationals”. That means people who want to get to the “next stage” in life (mortgage, marriage, business or health success) & want someone else to show them how.
This by definition means that in order to want to be part of such a group, you would have to believe there was something wrong with the way you are right now. Organisations like Hillsong count on the your fear of being bypassed by the Jones’s, of being left behind & it counts on your always wanting the “more” that God has for you.
Why? The Reason? Listen carefully…
THERE IS NO PROFIT IN PEOPLE WHO ARE SATISFIED IN LIFE & NO LEVERAGE TO GET MONEY OUT OF THEM
You think Hillsong is ever going to tell someone they have enough money, that they’re fit or beautiful enough, that they’re “straight” enough, or that they have enough property? Of course not, because there is no profit in self-satisfaction & acceptance. They must stir dissatisfaction & status anxiety in you & then expoit that. You must be seeking their approval that you are doing well.
It’s what the entire self-improvement industry is based on.
The best defence against organisations like HS? Accept yourself EXACTLY as you are & encourage others to do the same.
If everybody did that. That would change Hillsong, because…they’d be out of business.
Others thoughts? I’m sure i’ll be shot down for being too simplistic & idealistic here..
August 7th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
reve
i am not sure that we are to accept ourselves exactly as we are. we are meant to become more like Him and less like ourselves are we not??
i think a fundamental breakdown happens when (like HS) we are go after and justify our own desires over what he has made us for and intends for us
August 7th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Rev,
nothing wrong with being content with our lot in life. I agree with you statement to Accept yourself EXACTLY as you are & encourage others to do the same.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Thanks Wakey,
Abtruth, Yes i see your point,
I guess what i should have said, as you have, is that i don’t think there is any connection between christ-likeness & “self improvement / goal setting / realisation”. Important denition to be made.
But here is a question for you, how is being a married family man living in Christ’s image? Jesus did not marry, never had sex with a woman & never produced children. In fact, he denied family publicly in favour of personal mission & calling.
How is the modern Christians obsession with “family values” anything to do with Christ-likeness if we are to aspire to be like Him?
Are you married with children Abtruth? How does this shadow the life of Christ? Is not the Gay Christian who is celibate or the Catholic Monk closer to the image of Christ?
And how are Christian churches like Hillsong (but not limited to) encouraging young disciples to be like Christ in influencing them to follow their culture in marrying before they turn 25?
August 7th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
That of course should be “definition” in first paragraph!
August 7th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
I unfortunately need to crash before i get a response to this, stressful day at work - need sleep - will check tomorrow.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Breaking News! Thanks to our Hillsong Insider we have a ‘Note From Brian’ that was sent to all Hillsong members in response to Tanya’s book … he has been away working and holidaying in France.
Hopefully, we will be able to publish it soon!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Lionfish Re; 129
Any comparison I want to make about lance is based on my experience with him (in 2004-05). So it IS fair to make comparisons about dear Lance being a radical. It is not about his views being orthodox, it is about his “tactics” as he calls them.
“Lance will protest against hypocritacl attitude -”
Hypocritical attitude - would that be anyone who disagree’s with his views (esp on gay/christian issues)?
August 8th, 2007 at 10:00 am
Reve
there are plenty of things that Christ didn’t do that we do. saying that getting married is not being Christlike i think is a bit of a stretch.
by that reasoning we are not being Christlike if we don’t walk on water
its all to do with things like perseverance character obedience selflessness taking up ones own cross daily loving your enemies etc
August 8th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Abtruth,
You don’t have any control over whether you can walk on water, marriage is a choice you do have control over, & it dosen’t mirror the life of Jesus.
loving your enemies? You cannot love someone whilst trying to get them to hate something they can’t help being, Abtruth. As a matter of fact, turning someone against themselves is most definitely an act of hatred.
When you aggressively pursue me to question my sexuality (such as you did on the Homosexuality thread) when it took me 24 wasted, inauthentic years (my entire youth) to come to terms with it is not a “loving rebuke” it is sinister mischief. Do not kid yourself or cloak it in righteousness. Its just plain old nasty.
And when Hillsong profits by ecouraging people to be in a constant state of disatisfaction & perpetual aspiration to be something they are not it is also sinister.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Reve, my natural tendency is not to monogamy. This is actually who I am, I frequently have desires to be with other women, this is my biological imperitive, as well as my orientation. It is the job of the church to encourage me to be untrue to my natural orientation, and stay true to my wife. Now I understand that this is much more difficult for you, but I do not believe it is hatred to ask you not to participate in homosexual sex, it would be hatred to exclude and marginalize you however, regardless of your response.
rev
August 8th, 2007 at 11:42 am
It’s funny you know Rev, i was just wondering why you were one of the very few people i could take a rebuke from. I realised it is in part because you always start with a declaration of your own brokenness & imperfection before taking another to task over something & also because, with an issue like this, you begin with a prefacing understanding that i did not choose the way that i am any more than you did.
For such a physically powerful man you are one of the most humble & real people i know.
FWIW, i don’t think that a gay person’s responsibility for their sexual behaviour is reduced despite the fact that we are not allowed to marry. Maybe i should because of the obvious discrepancy of justice, but i don’t.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:44 am
thanks mate, that was very kind of you to say.
rev
August 8th, 2007 at 11:47 am
and obviosuly written by a gay man!….reve - don;t be scared of him - he’s in Melbourne he cant hurt us…it’s safe to tell him he’s just a girly man and doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:50 am
baldy
August 8th, 2007 at 11:59 am
Ouch! that’s not nice - see reve - he’s not nice at all - have at him, smite him (refer the GTEYBSOMSS before you post again though)
August 8th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Reve
read Revs post 144 again very closely
then go back to my argumentation on the God and Homosexuality string and you will find that this is my fundamental argument from beginning to end.
we all get frustrated with each other but i find so many people lash out when logically cornered in their beliefs … or just go away for a while then come back as though the argument had never happened..
in fact Reve on my very first post on the God an Homosexuality string to you on aug 24 2006 comment 646 page 22 i said this..
Reve Lance Et AL
i know i can be very prickly in an argument and will chase it to the ruddy end but note that i have argued the one point and have never argued for exclusion or marginalisation of anyone or intended to be hateful.. i will argue with all my might and attack any weak area of thinking but only to get to and acknowledge the truth.
Of late i have been giving as good as i get from the likes of David Castor and others, you may have been caught in the crossfire Reve and for that (my demeanor towards you) i am sorry..